Underwood M R, Morton V, Farrin A
Centre for Health Sciences, Barts and The London, Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry, Abernethy Building, 2 Newark Street, Whitechapel, London E1 2AT, UK.
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2007 Aug;46(8):1297-302. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kem113. Epub 2007 May 23.
To identify characteristics of randomized controlled trial participants which predict greater benefits from physical treatments for low back pain. If successful, this would allow more appropriate selection of patients for different treatments.
We did a secondary analysis of the UK Back pain Exercise And Manipulation trial (UK BEAM n = 1334) dataset to identify baseline characteristics predicting response to manipulation, exercise and manipulation followed by exercise (combined treatment). Rather than simply identifying factors associated with overall outcome, we tested for the statistical significance of the interaction between treatment allocation, baseline characteristics and outcome to identify factors that predicted response to treatment. We also did a post-hoc subgroup analysis to present separate results for trial participants with subacute and chronic low back pain to inform future evidence synthesis.
Age, work status, age of leaving school, 'pain and disability', 'quality of life' and 'beliefs' at baseline all predicted overall outcome. None of these predicted response to treatment. In those allocated to combined treatment, there was a suggestion that expecting treatment to be helpful might improve outcome at 1 yr. Episode length at study entry did not predict response to treatment.
Baseline participant characteristics did not predict response to the UK BEAM treatment packages. Using recognized prognostic variables to select patients for different treatment packages, without first demonstrating that these factors affect response to treatment, may be inappropriate. In particular, this analysis suggests that the distinction between subacute and chronic low back pain may not be useful when considering treatment choices.
确定随机对照试验参与者的特征,这些特征可预测腰痛物理治疗能带来更大益处。若研究成功,将有助于更合理地为不同治疗方法选择合适患者。
我们对英国背痛运动与手法治疗试验(UK BEAM,n = 1334)数据集进行二次分析,以确定预测对手法治疗、运动治疗以及手法治疗后再进行运动治疗(联合治疗)反应的基线特征。我们并非简单地确定与总体结果相关的因素,而是检验治疗分配、基线特征与结果之间相互作用的统计学显著性,以确定预测治疗反应的因素。我们还进行了事后亚组分析,以呈现亚急性和慢性腰痛试验参与者的单独结果,为未来的证据综合提供参考。
年龄、工作状态、离校年龄、基线时的“疼痛与残疾”、“生活质量”和“信念”均能预测总体结果。但这些因素均不能预测治疗反应。在接受联合治疗的患者中,有迹象表明,预期治疗有帮助可能会改善1年时的结果。研究入组时的发作时长不能预测治疗反应。
参与者的基线特征不能预测对UK BEAM治疗方案的反应。在未首先证明这些因素会影响治疗反应的情况下,使用公认的预后变量为不同治疗方案选择患者可能并不合适。特别是,该分析表明,在考虑治疗选择时,亚急性和慢性腰痛之间的区分可能并无用处。